Share this:

Edit: It seems the threats to leave the country may well be the Telegraph’s conjecture, rather than Kotick’s intent. Either way, he’s cheesed off with the government’s lack of support for the games industry.

Activision may be taking their ball and jumping on a plane, in response to the government’s decision to make it as expensive as possible to make videogames in the UK, despite glee-facedly lying about doing the opposite moments before the election. The Telegraph reports that Bobby Kotick may want to up and leave to friendlier shores, now that there’s going to be no tax break for developers. The shy, retiring Kotick explained, “I think it was a terrible mistake. There are so many other places that are encouraging the video games industry.”

There’s 600 Activision employees in Slough, who have yet to deny rumours that this potential move is really an excuse to leave Slough.

Problem is: this is a move that has basis. The government is actively destroying whatever is left of the economy and their abandonment of the games industry is only a small part of the far reaching problems they’ve created.

In short, abandonment of the UK is all too logical a move. A rat like Kotick knows a sinking ship when he sees one.

About your “rats” “argument”: If the rats are the only ones who are not delusionally staying on a sinking ship, I would be proud to be a rat.
I left my former employer, when I saw they were failing, and me only getting punished for trying to save them. I told my boss, I would come back in 2-3 years, and buy them for a song.
3 years later, they went bankrupt. I called them, and sang in my most beautiful voice. They didn’t get it. It didn’t matter. ;)

what, is this about a punitive tax, or simple not getting special tax breaks as if Activision were a professional sports team? (Not sure if you lot in the UK have billionaire sports team owners squeezing towns to build them multimillion dollar stadiums on the taxpayers backs or not)

It’s about the fact that taxes in the U.K. are so insane that any industry that isn’t granted some sort of tax break can’t afford to exist.

It’s one of the reasons that there’s no local film industry in the U.K.

It’s one of the reasons British people think Americans are disproportionately rich: but really everything is just twice as expensive as it needs to be, so living in Britain gets you half of your money’s worth. If petrol wasn’t so expensive British folks could afford to drive cars as much as Americans do; that guy in that film isn’t rich, he’s just living in a country where the gas prices are reasonable, et cetera.

What’s V.A.T. (“value added tax” as if taxing things adds value) these days? I remember it being something like seventeen percent when I lived in London. A few years ago people in New Jersey were furious at sales tax being raised to 7%, one of the highest in the U.S., and it hasn’t helped the local retail economy here.

Perhaps I’m missing some sarcasm here, but we do have a film industry; it also gets tax breaks. (Or did. The current government have done a slash and burn on so much that I’m not sure if this is still the case. I know they were looking at scrapping the UK film council.)

@ MadTinkerer: It’s about the fact that taxes in the U.K. are so insane that any industry that isn’t granted some sort of tax break can’t afford to exist. It’s one of the reasons that there’s no local film industry in the U.K.

There is also a film industry, which according to Oxford Economics “contributed £4.6bn to the UK’s gross domestic product in 2009″ with “36,000 fully employed in the country’s core film industry” … “exports from the UK film sector totalled £1.3bn in 2008, while London currently has 20 per cent of the global market share of visual effects work” … “the UK’s tax breaks cost about £110m a year, yet, should that be removed, the UK’s GDP would fall by £1.4bn, the report said” …

@ Torgen – you’ll occasionally get sports teams taking over a publicly funded stadium after it’s been built for another purpose (see City of Manchester Stadium; built for the Commonwealth Games and converted to a football stadium for the use of Manchester City – although City lease the stadium from Manchester’s city council, and Manchester City paid the cost of converting the stadium from general purpose to football use) but in general sports stadiums are largely funded privately.

The reason Britain doesn’t have much of a film industry is because most British films can’t get distribution and people would rather watch Meet the Fockers for reasons which continue to elude me. I probably watch more French films than British ones.

VAT was at 17.5% for a very long time. It was briefly reduced to 15% by the last Labour government as a fiscal stimulus, then put back up to 17.5% well before the election. As of yesterday, it’s 20%, which is lower than in Croatia, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Sweden.

In answer to the original question – it’s about a new government repealing the previous government’s tax-relief, specifically targeted at the video games industry.

For what it’s worth, I think that taxes are too high in general, but that targeted relief (i.e. protectionism) is also unwise. Whatever the going rate is, and whatever we think of it, everyone should be paying the same. So I’m quite unconcerned about this.

We have a film industry but it is quite weak i have to say and because most of the companies that fund it are from america they get most of the money from our big ones. Also we don’t have a British film quota like other countries do so were not getting the talent making really interesting films because there is no money for it

The previous (Labour) government did NOT introduce tax breaks for the games industry. What they did is wait until just before the election they knew they would lose, then made bold claims about planning to introduce it. They also made a lot of other uncosted, expensive and unaffordable claims (the forgemasters loan being just one of them) knowing full well the next government would have to cancel the lot of them.

It was a deliberate, cynical, and opportunistic move to try and make the next government look bad, with zero intention of ever actually doing any of it,.

Regarding the greater point, I’m against tax breaks for specific industries. Even mine. What I would vastly prefer is the government to clamp down on google and amazon, who claim to be based in Ireland and jersey, and thus avoid payign a single penny in UK corporation tax. Positech Games pays more to the UK taxman than Google, or Amazon. Explain that to me please!

If they paid their fair share, then the govt could reduce corp tax a bit for everyone, not just game developers.
Bah!

@Mad Tinkerer.
It’s called “Value Added Tax” not because it adds value, but because you are taxed on the value added to the product. So yes, what you sell on (if subject to VAT, which is not everything), you pay 20% tax on. However, you subtract from that the VAT that you paid for the raw materials in the first place. So at most stages the VAT paid by a company is a lot less than 20%.

(Of course, at the end of the day it results in a price rise to consumers of approx 20%, but thats taxation for you).

I also kind of not agree with industry specific Tax Breaks, but there happening in other countries so well Britain kind of has to do them to be competitive. Otherwise a lot of companies will go to the countries with the Tax Break leaving us with a hole. I know its already happened and Happening with the Animation industry since other countries like Asia and the like are giving like 25-30% Tax Breaks to Animation companies while Britain has 0%. If you were a company which one would you decide to go towards?

I agree with you though – if an industry fits with your national priorities then why not support it relative to other industries. Game design is full on ‘knowledge economy’, and unlike like certain other examples, doesn’t involve the periodic bankrupting of the nation. Also carpet bomb the tax haven Channel Islands (we haven’t sold the RAF jet yet have we?).

@jaheira watch the UK series called ‘The Office’ – it’ll sum it up for you, plus there’s a genius recital by blundering manager David Brent, which, if I’m being honest, makes reading the above poem even funnier :)

Likewise, I’m weighing up my options at the moment, and I might jump ship for a more sane location, where the quality of life is a little higher.

Disillusioned only barely begins to describe how I feel about the UK at the moment, and that most morons voted Conservative just tells me that this isn’t a country for me. I remember a while back, in an RPS thread, I said that Labour were the lesser evil, and they likely wouldn’t do anything as batshit insane as the Tories, those whom would likely doom our country as they did in the days of Thatcher.

Anyway, I was laughed out of that comments thread by Tory supporters – here on RPS. Oh, I could name names, but I’m not that petty. And frankly, I could be the one laughing now, but I just don’t have the energy for it. I’m far too despondent about this situation to take joy in any of it. Those who voted Tory fucked up. As those who vote Tory always fuck up.

One of these generations our country is going to learn the folly of that.

I mean, Labour is no saint. They have nutjob Mandelson there, but they’re a damn sight better than the Tories, as are the older Lib Dems far better than the Tories (I’m still angry at Clegg, though, so very angry). But things are going to get worse before they get better… and it’s only selfishness that’s going to motivate people to act. I think that once the middle-class realise just how much the Tory antics are biting into their wallets, a No Confidence vote may just be successful.

But really, I’m losing faith in this country, entirely, completely losing faith in this country and all the people in it.

Yes,those evil conservatives! As per usual magnificent Labour look like the good guys by deficit spending the entire time they are in government even while our economy is growing, and when there is inevitably a downturn (turns out mr. “end to boom and bust” Brown hadn’t permanently altered the economic cycle that has persisted for all of human history, despite his staggeringly arrogant belief otherwise), the conservatives get voted in, and people who still spout ridiculous student politics call them “evil” because they decide that being responsible and ensuring we don’t end up going cap in hand to the IMF (as Labour had to in the 70’s after the last time they bankrupted us), might be a good idea.

If the economy weren’t so massively in trouble, no doubt these tax breaks would have been instituted, but the UK isn’t the US and as such if we continue to deficit spend on the same scale as we are currently speculators will kneecap us, and everyone complaining about the spending reductions now will see what real slash and burn looks like. Still easier to act like a child and bash those mean mean tories

I’m on the same boat, though i’m in a massively difficult situation in that i’m a recent graduate. I can’t find a job anywhere because they’re all being absorbed by more qualified people who may have lost a job elsewhere. So I’m stuck trying to get into any job without much success.

I’ve been disillusioned with the UK for years now, not just due to its political ideologies. The problem is I can’t find a way out. Wonder if Australia are needing IT people. Anywhere is better than here.

That deficit excise is a nice shock doctrine distraction to put in horrible cuts and I don’t by it because the cuts were doing will be disastrous since were taking the people who got us out the recession and making them lose there jobs. Also if they truly wanted to they would get rid of tax loopholes and dodging but they don’t because there the ones doing the most of it. Were not in it together

People who argue that the cuts are entirely practical and pragmatic drank too much of the Kool Aid. Labour did grossly over-expand spending in certain areas, it’s true, but to argue that the cuts are not politically motivated is simply wrong. This is just as much about carrying out the kind of erosion of social systems that the Tories believe is Right and Good as it is saving us from catastrophic financial embarrassment.

On the specific issue of tax cuts: I don’t see why games dev should get a break.

“I’m with Wulf”. Almost. I don’t feel completely despondant about this country because I’ve never tried to live in any other countries so I can’t possibly begin to compare. But the UK culture is vapid at best and neanderthal at worst. And the hypocrisy of the west gets to me. And the idiocy of religion and government get to me. But I guess I’d feel that way the world over. I don’t know. I haven’t been there yet.

I believe people are angry/dissapointed with Nick Clegg because he’s effectively ‘sold out’ that is, made a desperate grab for any semblance of power (he gets to make the tea!) while exposing his total disinterest in issues that were previously some of his flagship concerns (tutition fees, anyone?). The two combined actions highlight how he is just as much a politician as they all are; That is, completely in it for themselves and utterly uninterested in serving the public (at least at the top). Look at Tony Blair for a perfect paradigm of the actual goal in mind for prospective prime ministers.

I find it funny that the conservatives are pinning their economic hopes on small to medium businesses in the private sector when you see (almost) news like this.

The point is that practically everybody agrees that deficit reduction is necessary now. There are no super-Keynesians who think we should keep hammering away with deficit spending.

The main disagreement is not about the ‘speed and severity’ of the cuts, but about the shape of them: one approach would be to place more burden on tax increases, the other on reducing state expenditure.

Jim is absolutely right that ideology plays a role at this point – it’s what informs your prioritisation of either tax hikes or spending cuts.

The coalition prefers the latter, the Labour party appears to prefer the former. Personally, I’m with the coalition on this one.

Nick Clegg has comitted political hara-kiri to get one thing – a referendum on electoral reform, without which a vote for Liberal Democrat will forever more be a ‘wasted vote’. Going into the coalition, I think this was the one thing that was non-negotiable and it is a massive, massive, massive win.

People criticising the Lib Dems for not delivering on their electoral promises seem to conveniently forget that they didn’t actually win the election. They got 30% of the vote and 5% of the seats!

I know coalitions are a bit new to everyone, but with 5% of the seats, if you can get 5% of your policies introduced then you’re doing pretty well. The other 95%, you are going to have to compromise on. I don’t want to see tuition fees raised any more than the next reasonably minded person, but sadly that’s what our broken political system determined people voted for, so there you go that’s what you get.

Now, if we have the referendum on electoral reform and people vote to keep it as it is, then I would seriously consider leaving the country.

@Stephen Roberts
“I find it funny that the conservatives are pinning their economic hopes on small to medium businesses in the private sector ”
Well, ideologically and in their rhetoric they are.
In reality, they, much like previous governments are so much effected by the lobbying of big corporates, the corporations are the only ones that really get anything from this.

@In general
It’s certainly true that the Conservatives are using the deficit problem set up by a Labour government that just couldn’t say no to throwing money at things (seriously, I realise everyone always wants more money, but is the basic concept of “save in the good times, borrow in the bad ones” that hard to handle. Anyone, even a committed lefty like me that they were increasing spending during boom times at a rate assuming the boom would last forever) as an excuse to do a lot of things they would do anyway, a lot of which don’t even help at all with the deficit. See the “bonfire of the quangos” which may even cost money, or the headlong rush towards privatization in many sectors (expect the state universities to be sold off if we get another Con/ConDem parliament). Also, the Conservative government has proven themselves to lie about on whose shoulders the burdens really lie a lot – aside from their continuing roles for known tax dodgers (Lord Ashcroft, Phillip Green), also claiming “progressive” reforms which are quite the contrary (although to be fair, reducing benefits without hitting the poor harder than the rich is always going to be difficult, if you look only at welfare.

The idea that the Conservative and Unionist Party of Great Britain were the chaps to sort out an issue with the under-regulation of – and an imbalance of our economy toward – the City is a source of much hilarity and empuzzlement. Not that New Labour were, either; and certainly not Nick Clegg’s pack of Orange Book sociopaths. But lesser evils, and all that.

Grumpy Gordon’s problems were, in large part, Tory problems. He tried to enact Social Democratic spending changes (Which were needed, by the way: I may be young, but even I remember what, say, South View Junior’s School or the Leeds General Infirmary looked like in 1997.) while sticking to a neo-liberal (hate that word, but there you are) tax agenda. Circles were not squared. It’s important to remember, though, which side of the equation went kaput. Ill-advised as PFI might be (and we’ve John Major to thank for those, not that that’s any excuse), it wasn’t new school roofs or hospital wards.

Meanwhile, back in Westminster, every second quote out of the place mentions the Maoists. Not content with the Great Leap Forward in attacking public sector workers and the disabled, it seems we’re to have a cultural revolution. Given thirty million people died in the original, and it precipitated the essential death of Chinese Communism (not the intent, to put it mildly), the metaphor might be a little ill-advised, but who cares? Revolution is not a dinner party.

I disagree. There was no chance at all that the Liberal Democrats would ever “win” the election or gain a sizable control of power. To sit back and say “well we didn’t win the election” is a cheap way of attempting to get out of the utter mess they created by giving the promise in the first place.

What angers people about this isn’t that the promise was broken – we’re used to that – but rather the hypocrisy involved during the pre-election debates where Clegg stood as some sort of white knight, arguing that politics is full of broken promises and that it needs to change. Then post election he does exactly the sort of things he was arguing against, all in the name of “well we didn’t win!” He’s effectively destroyed Lib Dem credibility, and has disillusioned the next generation of voters.

“I know coalitions are a bit new to everyone, but with 5% of the seats, if you can get 5% of your policies introduced then you’re doing pretty well.”

Specious. The Liberals are needed to pass any laws in the Commons, the Tories have no majority. Hence the coalition. Of course, if they blocked anything, Cameron could call an election and would now win it, because why vote Lib Dem when you can have the real thing? That is entirely Nick Clegg’s fault, however.

“Now, if we have the referendum on electoral reform and people vote to keep it as it is, then I would seriously consider leaving the country.”

Give me a reason AV is any better than the current system, and I’ll vote for it. As I see it now, it’s a sop to distract from real issues with our Parliament: A lack of any proportionality, and surfeit of over-powered party whips.

Well the was an interview on Radio 4 the other week where the Liberal Democrats said that they made all their promises because they had no expectation of winning, so never expected to have to do anything about them. Now I know everyone does that, but the talk about “no-more broken promises” and then actually saying that you didn’t intend to honour them.

Some of my friends voted Lib-dem because they believed they would support student interests in any coalition, I doubt they’ll be voting at all next time.

AV would be better because then if you disagreed with the majority of your constituency, your disagreement would still register. Even the direction of your disagreement would register. At the moment, neither of these things is true. I’d prefer PR, but any port in a storm.

@Lack_26

The “Liberal Democrats” said that? What, all of them? In unison?

Going into the coalition, they could take a moral high ground, or try and accomplish something useful. They might yet accomplish something useful. Not much point taking the moral high ground under an electoral system where you can get 30% of the vote for a 5% share of power.

The Liberal Democrats cannot possibly ever win an election under the current system. Their support isn’t geographically concentrated enough. It never will be. 1st priority? Change the system! Any concession is worth it. Even if it takes 30 years to win back voter confidence, it will be worth it. They can do fuck all to help the students or anyone else with 5% of the seats.

Had all of the Liberal Democrats voted against the increase in tuition fees and removal of the HE grant, as they staunchly (or not, as it turned out) pledged, there would be no such rise. The Liberal Democrats had the power to stop it. It was a moral failure, not pragmatism, and you are being either mendacious or stupid. Stop it.

In any case, the further corruption of our Higher Education system seems a rather high price for the ability to rank three arse-licking poleclimbers in order instead of just picking one. I do not see how my disagreement registers; if my chosen candidate does not win my first preference disappears just like a vote under FPTP.

I’m not sure if it was Nick Clegg himself, but it was certainly one of the senior leaders of the party. So I’m not sure, given the representative systems of the parties (and our country in general), that my statement was that inaccurate.

So not to offend anyone or anything but as a Stupid Yank, there is one thing about the U.K. that i never quite understood. Whats up with the Royal Family? as far as i can tell they just live in palaces and throw big ass parties with tax payer money? do they even serve a legit purpose in your goverment?

Fuck man, the queen drives arond in th soild gold horse drawn carrage. sell some of that shit off and you will be out of debt in no time.

Come to Malaysia (like Codemasters) or SIngapore (like Ubisoft). The Malaysian goverment practically pays Codemasters to open a studio in Kuala Lumpur, where local designers work on the art assets for games like DiRT and Dragon Rising.

And it’s all customer services. There aren’t enough game dev jobs here to keep anyone in the country. Everyone I know trying to get a dev job is leaving the country(me included). We’re being trained for export same as always. Though i’m happy to be one of the sensible rats.

Umm dude i don’t know where you get your info but INTEL is based in the U.S.A. and intel just bought macafee so they are defacto based in the U.S.A. just cause companies have holdings in other countries dosn’t mean the are based there.

P.S. Activision blizzard is also and american company, granted after the merger majority control was owned by the french….
VMware is based in Palo Alto, CA
Macafee is based out of Santa Clara, CA
Pretty much every tech company you listed are all american Tech companies, including Google, and Apple. and Ireland is among the list of contries that are on the verge of backrupcy.

P.S. there are only about 4 Blue chip companies in your list, that is if you are using the same “Blue Chip” term as investers do……

Didn’t Kotick try and threaten to ‘abandon PS3′ because Sony wasn’t as cheap to develop for as the Xbox? Didn’t he also try and strong arm Microsoft to either reduce the XBL subscription or give him a portion of the proceeds? Like Pachter, the guy just speaks to get into the headlines (assuming he has even actually ‘spoke’, based on Alec’s above comment).

Also, wasn’t the tax break specifically for games scrapped in favour of the more sensible and universal ‘business startup’ idea? Who gives a shit if Activision leave the country – it would be better if a bunch of like minded developers set up their own studio with proper funding than just become a disposable asset farm for a big multi-national.

The failure for a prospective tax relief to materialise – especially one offered by an administration which was manically writing uncashable pre-election cheques – hardly seems like sound basis for a move, and indeed there seems to be little (other than the Telegraph’s editorialising) to suggest that this is what is going to happen.

Besides, Activision will be in line to benefit from the relaxation of corporation tax in the next few years, just like everyone else.

@Optmxaimal
That doesn’t guarantee that they actually pay the taxes.
See Vodaphone (apparently evaded £6,000,000,000 in tax, agreed a deal with the UK government to pay back just under a quarter of that. Even worse, they were apparently prepared to pay significantly more than that, but the current government apparently lacks interest).

Of all the companies in video games, Activision would be the least likely to qualify for Labour’s proposed tax break. “Quintessentially British”? Activision? Hah! Lionhead, and Zombie Cow, maybe. Activision? Hah!

Also, anyone who thinks Labour is any better than the Tories or the Lib Dems is deluded: they’re full time politicians, they all suck.

Not sure what people are getting so narked about really. At least 50% of you here would have voted tory. You voted tory, you got tory. Tough shit – what’s there to be surprised about? A right wing political party is doing what they do best.

I certainly didn’t vote for them, mainly as i’m a compassionate human being who doesn’t like his fellow citizens to be treated like shite, but up to half of you (in the UK) most probably did vote for them. You’re reaping the seeds you have sown. Sorry, but I don’t have much sympathy for those of whom who voted tory and are now currently moaning about this – you did this to us.

“At least 50% of you here would have voted tory.”
How’d you figure that? Firstly, a younger demographic (than the population as a whole), like RPS will have is less likley to have A: voted and B:voted Conservative than the average person.
Out of the voting age population as a whole, 65% voted, of which 36.1% voted Conservative. So about 23% of the voting eligible UK population voted for a Conservative MP. And that’s ignoring the RPSes who are either too young or too foreign to vote. So somewhere south of 20% of the people commenting on this article probably voted Conservative.